About your Search

20121002
20121010
Search Results 0 to 13 of about 14 (some duplicates have been removed)
.e.o. of general electric, jack welch, seemed to suggest that the job numbers were too good to be true. look at this tweet he sent out and i quote, "unbelievable jobs numbers. the chicago guys will do anything, can't debate? change the numbers." the labor secretary called the accusations ludicrous adding and i quote, "i'm insulting when i hear because we have a very professional civil service organization, these are hour best trained and most skilled individuals." jack welch will be the guest of neil cavuto on "your world" next hour. joining us is the author of "rebounders, how winners pivot from set back to success." good to see you. you don't think anyone is cooking the books? >>guest: i never would say this about jack welch, an accomplished business executive but the suggestion is silly. there are a lot of variation in the surveys. we heard about that a few moments ago. what is likely to happen in the next month or two, the numbers are too high or too low and the next set of numbers are revised. they start, the surveys, they come closer to together. there were oddities in the survey. but
chairman jack welch kicked off the conspiracy tweeting, quote, unbelievable job numbers. these chicago guys will do anything. can't debate so change numbers. and laura igraham says, job numbers from labor secretary hilda solis are total pro obama. congressman allen west challenged the numbers, quote, chicago style politics is at work here. and, of course, rush limbaugh took time to get unreal. >> it's no different than obama declaring the temperature is going to be 75 degrees every day no matter what your thermometer says. >> that's the problem with the right and that's the problem with governor romney. they can't stand the truth. things are getting better. joining me now is joan walsh, editor at large for salon.com and an msnbc political analyst. and e.j. dionne, columnist for "the washington post" and an msnbc contributor. joan, let me start with you. what's behind these conspiracy theories? >> they just don't want to accept the realities that the president has made things better, reverend al. i think you forgot one. rush, when hurricane ivan was -- rush accused president obama of messing
on twitter from former head of ge, jack welch. >> welch is one of america's most rebe inspected former ceo's. so when he tweets, people tend to listen. within minutes of the jobs report he tweeted quote, unbelievable jobs numbers. this chicago guys will do anything, can't debate so change numbers and facing a torrent of criticism for that. welch stopped by his tweet and those numbers. >> this whole number is made up of a whole mess of an assumptions who is participating and who is not working and who is trying to work, but dropped out. all of these things, it just raises the question, oh, i think there ought to be a good discussion about how this number is calculated. >> and most analysts aren't dismissing his crimsism as utterly without evidence and at the same time pointing out that the jobs numbers reflect an obama policy that has the economy stuck in neutral. >> they had full charge of the first two years and the policies that this president put into place actually made it worse, including the fact that obamacare is actually, you ask small employers, it's causing them not to hire becau
. doug we talked about a tweet from jack welch. did that ignite the controversy? >>reporter: the recovery surrounding friday's release of the unemployment numbers continues to swirl after jack welch, the respected former c.e.o. of g.e. treated "unbelievable jobs numbers. the chicago guys will do anything. can't debate? change numbers." facing criticism if the tweet he stuck by the criticism of the numbers. >> this number is made up of a whole mess of assumptions: who is participating, who is not working, who is trying for work, who has dropped out. it just begs the question. i think there ought to be a good discussion how this number is calculated. >>reporter: most analysts and the obama campaign are dismanage the criticisms as "without evidence." >> we wonder why institutions in this country are, the perception of institutions are failing, because people go on tv and make sufficient h stuff -- make stuff up. >> they had full charge of the first two years and the policies this president put into place actually made it worse, including the fact that obamacare is tale, if you ask employers,
that there is further proof that the economy continues to heal. others not so sure. jack welch tweeted this moments ago. unbelievable jobs numbers. these chicago guys will do anything, can't debate so change numbers end quote. martha: hilda so liz says that that notion is lewd today rust. joined by chris wallace anchor of fox news sunday . good morning, chris. >> good to be with you. martha: what do you make about the backlash for this 7.8 number? >> it's understandable, because it's good news for president obama at a time when he very much needed it. the fact is that he had a bad debate, that his campaign was raoeulgs a reeling, is an overstatement but hit a serious pothole. and the talking point, which is that the unemployment rate under this president has been over 8% for 48 months, they can't say that any more. and obviously some romney supporters aren't happy about that. martha: whenever you look at the economic numbers i always wonder. obviously as you point out the president's detractors will try to mine mice the number and the president will build it up. it's down to everyone's individual econo
and significant decrease in the unemployment rate. jack welch, he went to as far to suggest that the numbers may be manipulated by the obama administration. do you think that the numbers add up? >> i think the suggestion that the numbers was cooked is relatively ridiculous. that being said. economists at the labor department will admit freely that there is a lot of margin of error in these numbers. a month after each job report these numbers are revised upward or downward. the question of the number came out of the household survey, 800,000 plus number, there is a lot of margin for error, possibly as much as 400,000. that is admitted by folks within the labor department, as well. i think you can't get too hung up on the overall numbers because typically these are revised upward or downward. that tends to happen a month later when we stop paying attention. >> heather: what will the numbers do in terms of swaying voters' opinions, specifically undecided voter? do you expect to see a change in the polls as a result of this? >> it's a tough question. i generally think the jobs reports do not move as
on the jack welch tweet. >> you wonder why institutions in this country are the perception of institutions in the country are failing because people go on tv and make stuff up. ask for the evidence and he said he had none. >> we continue to make progress. 31 consecutive months of private sector job growth. certainly we are not where we want to be. >> many analysts who combed through the unemployment data released attribute the decline to a big increase in part-time work. people looking for full-time jobs unable to find them and they are settling for part-time jobs. there were some 582,000 new part-time jobs created last month. the bureau of labor statistics categorizes the number as "part time for economic reasons." not exactly a vote of confidence in the state of the economy, shannon. >> shannon: all right, doug. a lot more on the numbers. we will break them down later with ben stein, well known economist and author and humorist as well. we might need a little bit of that. thank you, doug. is the lower unemployment number going bolster president obama's reelection bid or be ammunition for
Search Results 0 to 13 of about 14 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)